I forgot to set a reminder so I’m a little late getting to this, but here we are again:

Are you a “tankie”?

Respond “yes” or “no”, I’ll collate results later

This process is being undertaken to determine if so-called “tankies” are conspiring to make you (yes, you) have a bad time on the internet!

vague or informal answers will be interpreted by the central authority (me). Only top level comments will be counted. I will not be providing further instructions or clarifications.

🤯

Link to previous results (very serious) hexbear / lemmy,ml

Link to previous “are you a tankie?” thread

I’ll likely check back in a week, my old pc died so itll take a little bit of time to prettify the results and write a report

Ciao, and of course, imperialism must be destroyed.

  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m a moderate and believe in supporting the lesser of two evils, which means critical support for enemies of US imperialism. I’m also something of a centrist because I believe anarchists and Marxist-Leninists and other left tendencies all have good ideas.

    So yeah, I’m a moderate centrist.

      • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t mind people calling themselves tankies but I don’t think using a “slur” as an identifier is in any way helpful. Nor does anyone who uses it demeaningly really know what happened in Hungary. I barely know anything about it.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          For the sake of the poll, it’s really asking “are you a communist?” I generally don’t refer to myself as a “tankie” for similar reasons as you said, but clarified my position to expressly include that as far as this poll is about support for communism/leftism/etc, it applies to me. Just hoping the final numbers show a good amount of “yes” answers simply due to wanting a strong showing of leftists.

          • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            I really think the wording should be changed. Liberals will gladly rip everything out of context. The word Tankie is infinitely more loaded than Communist. Most Liberals even think it’s about Tiannenmen square and the tank man and you already know how much propaganda they consumed about Tiannenmen square.

            • manuallybreathing@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              I don’t think anyone sincerely identifies as a tankie, I just made this thread so I can remake my funny chart with the title are tankies conspiring to make you have a bad time on the internet?

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              I align most with Nia Frome’s viewpoint in Marketing Socialism. Essentially, we can’t shy away from loaded terms, liberals will accuse us regardless, so it’s more important to correctly demystify rather than taking the “easy” path of distancing ourselves from “tankies,” as though “tankie” means anything other than “communist/leftist/anti-imperialist/etc.”

              We should correctly call out “tankie” as something to not be afraid of, it just means “commie” or “red” or “pinko,” and not let the word have power over discourse when discussing leftist politics.

              • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                But ‘Tankie’ is not the ideology at all. There is no reason to defend anything which is not the ideology itself. The word Tankie is so meaningless and vague that the only reason to ever use it is if people are actually trying to push on it. In which case you’d first have to ask them what they even mean by the word Tankie because they probably don’t know what it means to begin with (nobody really does at this point).

                Using it as a self-identifier is self-defeating.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Using “tankie” as a self-identifier has the same effect as calling oneself a “commie,” it signals that being accused of being a communist isn’t anything to take offense to. If I am going to be called a “commie, pinko, red, tankie, etc” then it is best to call it out for what it is: Accurate insofar as it describes me as a communist. I’m not going to deny those who call me by such pejoratives, rather I’m just going to explain why I’m a communist. Using it as a self-identifier blunts the pejorative and makes it less effective in public discourse to shut down communist speech.

  • Diva (she/her)@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’m an anarchist though I do get called a tankie quite a lot as a pejorative.

    I’m opposed to all states. That said as someone who lives in the west I don’t really care to spend a lot of energy being mad about what my governments state enemies are doing.

    ‘democracy’ in capitalist states is a cruel facsimile of actual democracy. If you don’t have money for rent you might as well be unpersoned, corporations are people and money is free speech.

  • FoundFootFootage78@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    No, while I do hold countries like China and Cuba in higher regard than America, I don’t hold them in higher regard than any real democracies and I hold countries like Russia and North Korea in even lower regard than America.

    • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      real democracies

      Those glorious democracies where money is king and it’s illegal to be against Palestinian genocide

      and I hold countries like Russia and North Korea in even lower regard than America.

      So you don’t like america but you hate it’s designated state enemies more? Damn, how enlightened of you. Truly a worldview beyond reproach or control.

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    In that “tankie” is just a pejorative for a communist, yes. I’m a Marxist-Leninist, and I uphold AES as legitimate.

    Workers of the world, unite! ☭

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Oh god oh fuck I’m the type of commie that isn’t obsessed with millitary equipment I didn’t study oh god oh fuck

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Tankie is a pejorative for authoritarians that advocate violence to further their political aims. The particular ideology is just window dressing.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        You’ve expanded the definition to include nearly everyone. All states are authoritarian, in that they are all instruments by which one class wields its authority over other classes. Revolution is the most authoritarian action there is, as was liberating the slaves in Haiti, the Statesian south, etc. You’ve erased any analysis of what these political aims are, essentially saying only pacifists have validity, and historically pacifists have been some of the least effective, or even damaging to their movements.

        I suggest you read the articles I linked, you can read both in the span of ~15 minutes and you’ll have a much better understanding of what “tankie” means.

        • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Your theory has just one minor flaw: every violent revolution ever has resulted in one clique of repressive assholes being replaced with another. And every time they’ve betrayed every ideal they ever did it didn’t have in order to cling on to power. How is your revolution going to be different?

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Your comment has one major flaw: it’s wrong.

            Revolution in France, for example, ovethrew an oppressive monarchy. Napoleon took power, but it was still an improvement, and in the long run was even better. In Haiti, slavery was overthrown, in Algeria colonialism was overthrown. These are just for national liberation movements and general revolution.

            Socialist revolution in Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Korea, and more have all dramatically improved key metrics like life expectancy, dramatically democratized society, increased literacy rates, and lowered disparity while dramatically developing society. Socialism achieves far better metrics at similar levels of wealth and development, even in the face of brutal sanctions.

            There is no “betrayal of ideals,” there’s the real process of existing in the world and facing real struggles. Socialism isn’t magic or perfect, it’s simply a much better economic system than capitalism. It isn’t immune to problems or struggles, and it doesn’t gift those running the economy with prophetic visions. Liberal anti-communists hold socialism to a higher standard than liberal systems, refusing it outright if it isn’t heaven on Earth, and call it a “betrayal” if it isn’t immediately a perfect wonderland while giving liberalism a pass, or mild critique.

            I expect revolution in the US Empire to go a similar way, only that it won’t be at risk of being nuked or sanctioned to death by the US Empire.

            I highly suggest doing more research on the topic at hand, I can make recommendations if you want.

            • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              So having all of Europe drenched in blood by Napoleon was an improvement? And you conveniently forgot the terror. Similar things could be said about your other examples. The rest is just assertions without evidence so I’ll have to pull Hitchens’ razor.

              • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                The rest is just assertions without evidence

                Literally all of your claims have been assertions without evidence

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                THERE were two “Reigns of Terror,” if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the “horrors” of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break? What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror—that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves.

                -Mark Twain

                In the end, moving beyond feudalism to capitalism was progressive, just as moving on beyond capitalism to socialism was and is progressive. This is rarely bloodless, but it pales in comparison to the daily violence of the present system.

                Secondly, I did offer evidence upon request, I find when I just dump sources people tune out. If you have specific questions, I can back them up with answers and evidence, otherwise the lack of evidence applies just as much to you.

              • Diva (she/her)@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                The rest is just assertions without evidence so I’ll have to pull Hitchens’ razor.

                Neocon Iraq war supporting Christopher Hitchens? weems like a weird guy to quote if you’re opposed to the state murdering people but ok

        • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Obviously, the term “tankie” is only applied to the left. My point was that in that respect there is not really any difference between the extremes of the political spectrum. You could even say they converge in some way.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            No, horseshoe theory is just liberalism trying to distance itself from fascism, when historically liberalism abd fascism correspond to capitalism doing okay and capitalism in crisis respectively.

            Further, liberalism has also been responsible for mass violence, both the progressive kind such as in the French revolution, and the horribly reactionary kind when it comes to slavery, colonialism, genocide of Palestine, etc.

              • Count042@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                You literally just redefined the word ‘tankie’ when called out for your shitty definition of it.

                Also George Washington was a leftist extremist to the British monarchy.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                What words did I redefine? What “whataboutism” did I do? I explained very clearly why your definition is bad, and applies to everyone. Comparison is not “whataboutism” inherently.

    • tlmcleod@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      What is AES in this context? I’m pretty sure it’s not encryption or a corporation lol

        • zaknenou@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I can see the difference between these and EU, but isn’t EU mostly socialist? Like France for example, isn’t it considered so? Assuming socialist ≠ Marxist.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            No, the EU is all capitalist, in every economy (even the nordics) private ownership is the principle aspect and governs the large firms and key industries. Financial capital and by extension imperialism are the dominant forces in society.

            In the countries I listed, it’s the opposite, public ownership is at minimum the principle aspect. Some are more heavily publicly owned, like the DPRK and Cuba, and others have more market forces at play, like Vietnam and the PRC, but in all cases public ownership is principle.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Algeria is more complicated. It has had a long history of communists and socialist revolutionaries such as Frantz Fanon, but is currently a capitalist country. It’s far better than imperialist countries like France, and has been very progressive in opposing imperialism and colonialism, but isn’t considered socialist.

  • Bobr@lemmy.libertarianfellowship.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I am in a superposition of being a tankie and not being a tankie at the same time.

    Tankies consider me a lib because I dislike DPRK.

    Libs consider me a tankie because I dislike “the west”.

    Oh well

  • monocles@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    No. But my anarchist friends consider me one. Also I don’t consider the term tankie to be synonymous with communist or socialist.

    If there were no meddling from the imperialist special interest abroad, there would have been no need for the tanks. Unfortunately the siege is ever present and ubiquitous.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      “Tankie” isn’t synonymous with communist in the same way “pinko” isn’t, both are just pejoratives for communists.

  • darthelmet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Probably? At least in the sense that I’ve managed to gather from the very confused online arguments about the term. I’m a communist. While I’d love it if we could all peacefully vote our way into a better society, I recognize that it’s probably not going to happen and whatever nastiness we’d have to do to actually make the change is worth moving past the endless awfulness that is capitalism. And for the existing countries, while they’re not magical Christmas lands, I’ve learned they’re not quite as bad as the capitalists have fear- mongered.

    And I get Anarchists thinking it’s states all the way down but…………. I don’t know what to tell you. What’s the alternative? Even if I want to get where you’re going, how do we get there? Where is the bus/train? I don’t see any running to get there.

    • Ibuthyr@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      A communist isn’t a tankie per sé. Tankies are people who blindly follow authoritarians of a communist regime and defend/deny the gruesome acts committed by said authoritarians. The idea behind communism is a valid one. In a perfect world, communism would lead to the star Trek utopia. Problem is, assholes will always take advantage and turn everything to shit. I still prefer communism over the heap of flaming shit most of the world lives in.

      • darthelmet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        How does that work? I assumed one Lemmy account covered everything. Where do I go for each of these?

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Lemmy accounts are kinda like islands, but you can visit and see other islands that are on good terms, or “federated.” Federation can be one-way, ie you can see and comment on another instance’s posts but they can’t see yours, or it can be two-way, and you can comment back and forth. You are on Lemmy.world’s view of a Lemmy.ml post. There are comments from Hexbear and Lemmygrad users on this post that I can see, but you can’t, like this one.

          Lemmy.world is defederated from Hexbear.net and Lemmygrad.ml, the two biggest communist instances. In order to see their content and interact with their users, you need an account on an instance like those two, or Lemmy.ml, Lemmy.zip, etc. You don’t need one for each instance, just one federated with what you want to see.

          Does that make sense?

          • darthelmet@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            So I just pick one of them and I’m good? Any suggestion which one to pick? Just the biggest?

            EDIT: Also, am I able to just be logged into both so I can see both sides at the same time or do I have to swap back and forth if I want to check out world or the commy instances?

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Well, what is it that you want? Do you want one account that can see almost everything? Lemmy.zip or Lemmy.ml would be better than Lemmy.world, and you can chat with Hexbear and Lemmygrad users as well as Lemmy.world users that way. Do you just want to talk with communists? Lemmygrad.ml or Hexbear.net might be a better fit, you won’t be able to interact with Lemmy.world that way. You can see Lemmy.world content and comment on it from Grad, but they can’t see your content. Hexbear defederated from .world so it doesn’t even show up.

              Personally, I use all 3 depending on what I want to do.

              I recommend checking out this guide by a good Lemmygrad comrade!